>
> RAD, like thin, has many definitions. For mine (which may or may not
> qualify as yours), if a customer comes in and says, I would like you to
use
> "ZYX" font which is standard in out 100K person organisation, for HTML, it
> is just a simple matter of adding a line, <basefont>. If different
clients
If you use a browser that supports it. EG, you can put basefont at the start
of a document in IE, and it will accept the face and size you set in the
entire document. Do that in netscape, and you have to reset atleast the font
size in each tabel cell. Incompatability between browsers and the spec is a
massive issue - and I must say, even tho netscape are not (as much of) the
evil empire, Netscape is SO far behind the ball on this one. Netscape 4.x
browser is a VERY apalling piece of software. (kinda like my spelling,
really...)
> wants different fields to display, just change the HTML - no need to touch
> that EXE, redesign forms, recompile code, install new exe, etc. Now that
> *IS* RAD!
EXCEPT: it took you 3-5 times longer to write it in the first place!!! I'm
talking about something that can get close to the interactivity of a fully
blown binary - a bunch of fields on a form dont even come close to cutting
it.
HTML, like the english language, is very easy to do poorly, and very hard
(ie, timeconsiming) to do very well.
> Better still, have an HTML specialist design you web pages, and have a
> programmer do the program. I have seem many applications that work fine,
> but have very poor UI - classic case of one designed by programmers. Its
> hard to find good programmers who are also good UI designers, and vice
> versa, so why not separate the two.
Yup - except when economic pressures prevent it. Personally, I quite like
doing both....
> HTML makes this very easy. If you want
> to change the look and feel, get another HTML designer to do the job.
You do have a point here, but doing it in HTML DOES make for a LOT of extra
work, which kinda gets rid of the RAD aspect (aside from simple things like
changing fonts)
>
> Then, there is always Java applets ...
Oh, god, please, NO!
>
> > Here's my current ideas of "thin"
> > 1. Browser based (thin but with no RAD, not if you want it to
> > look good) OR
>
> How many EXE based applications *look* better than well designed web
sites?
Not many. Sebel Sales is one, some of the really new MS stuff is another.
Mostly, people dont take the time to do good interaction design, let alone
an attractive UI
OTOH, most people can't do well designed web sites either :)
>
> > 2. EXE - single .exe, maybe a few unregistered DLL's,
> > packaged up in a way
> > that the user doesn't need to do anything to install/update -
> > ie, a .cab,
> > NOT an installshield install (bloatware to install bloatware).
>
> Still requires an install ... and the associated problems with
compatibility
> with client machines. Think for a moment that a $10 each cost of
> installation per workstation on a 1000 client system will cost $10000! ...
And your saying that, say, on a network of 95 machine, upgrading each one to
IE4 or 5 (or netscape....) is NOT a head ache?! They are just more likely to
have a browser on their desktop.
> then you release a new version! For browser based applications, leave the
> cost of installing the browser up to the hardware vendor - ie., you buy a
> computer, you expect to have an OS and a browser installed at the very
> least. Nothing else to install.
Doesn't hold for me, not after doing web applications (as opposed to web
_sites_) for 2 years. Say, for eg, you have an app that works in 4.x +
browsers (not a big as - 3.x were pretty much useless). Now, is that IE4.0,
4.01, 4.01sp1, 4.5(mac), 5.0, 5.01. MS have almost got it right - the app is
99% likely to run in all of these except for the MAC one, which is
terminally broken.
Netscape: 4.0, 4.01, 4.02....4.08, 4.5, 4.51, 4.6, 4.7, 4.71, 4.8 etc. If it
works in one of these, its UNLIKELY to properly function in any of the
others, tho it is more likely to work cross platform.
Either way, I'd have to add that using Netscape for a serious (ie,
interaction) app is a waste of time - is very limited in what it can do with
DHTML, and its also almost totally proprietry. Now we can throw Mozilla and
Opera into the mix. Joy.
The idea of web apps is a good one, I think, but the current state of
browsers is such that its not feasable to drop binary apps for every
function...
the app I'l writing is literally 0.1 install (ie, slighty more than zero). I
have the EXE, an INI file (whcih can be ignored), and (I think) 2 DLL's (the
Visi for Delphi DLL, and the Visi for C++ library that it wraps around). If
the user is on the same network as the server, there is NO configuration
needed - just plonk the files somewhere (same directory), and run the EXE.
Simple. If they dont have Winsock 2, they need to upgrade to get it- but
then, they would have IE3, so putting out a web app wouldn't solve that
problem either.
>
> > 3. NO DB libraries on the client. PERIOD.
> > MIDAS/CORBA/DCOM?/HTTP transport.
>
> Definitely agree about the DB library. HTTP transport is usually built
into
> most modern OS, so it is not an issue. As for the rest, I classify them
as
> thick - for the installation reason above.
HTTP is NEVER built in - tho you can get lib's that compile into your app.
You can request a document from a server (via the MS ActiveX controls, which
may or may not be there), but you still have SFA control over what is
actually said on the connection.
> Definitely agree on this one. The user does not need to be bombarded with
> 1001 options before the software can be used.
Exactly - install it (which should throw it into, say, c:\program
files\yourapp, and NEVER EVER put ANYTHING AT ALL in c:\winnt\system32), and
then run it - it should work out of the box, to some degree. The user can
then configure it as and when they need to.
In the example I posed before (mail warrior), you do exactly that - fire the
EXE into a directory and run it. It asks where you want to put your mail
files (ok, it should default to the directory the EXE is in), and asksk you
to setup a mail account. Thats it. It then makes all the ini files etc for
you. It is then compleatly functional - tho you can tweek it if you want to.
Wanna backup or move your mail? No problem - just backup the directory where
it is.... easy.
N
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
New Zealand Delphi Users group - Delphi List - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Website: http://www.delphi.org.nz
